The Netflix docuseries American Murder: Gabby Petito is facing criticism from some viewers who are questioning the ethics behind the filmmakers’ decision to use artificial intelligence to recreate Petito’s voice.
Petito’s disappearance and death made headlines in September 2021, when authorities launched a nationwide search for the 22-year-old, who had documented a cross-country road trip with her fiancé, Brian Laundrie, on social media.
Laundrie was considered a “person of interest” before he went missing. He was later confirmed to have died by suicide, and authorities found a note in which he took responsibility for the crime.
The three-part series, released this week, features interviews with Petito’s loved ones, as well as photographs, video footage, maps, and excerpts from her writings. The first episode includes a disclaimer stating that Petito’s journal entries and text messages were “brought to life in this series in her own voice, using voice recreation technology,” NBC News reports.
Although directors and executive producers Julia Willoughby Nason and Michael Gasparro told Us Weekly that Petito’s family gave them their “blessing” to recreate her voice for the documentary, many viewers have expressed discomfort with this creative choice. On social media, some X users described the AI-generated voice as “unsettling,” “deeply uncomfortable,” and “completely unnecessary.” A TikTok video, which has already garnered nearly 500,000 views, called the decision a “step too far.”
So far, neither Gasparro and Nason’s representatives nor Netflix have responded to requests for comment on the controversy.
A recurring debate over AI in documentaries
Using artificial intelligence to recreate voices in documentaries is not a new practice. However, audiences remain divided on the ethics of digitally reviving the voices of deceased individuals.
In 2021, the film Roadrunner: A Film About Anthony Bourdain sparked similar controversy when AI was used to narrate excerpts from notes written by the late food host, who died in 2018. In that case, director Morgan Neville used software to create an “AI model” of Bourdain’s voice. He told The New Yorker that viewers “probably don’t know” which lines were spoken by the AI.
Speaking to Us Weekly, Gasparro explained that the filmmakers had access to extensive material from Petito, provided by her parents.
“She had journals from a young age, and there was so much of her writing. She documented her trips and much of her life from an early age. We thought it was really important to bring those writings to life,” Gasparro said. “At the end of the day, we wanted to tell the story as much as possible through Gabby. It’s her story.”
Is it ethical to recreate the voice of a deceased person?
Merve Hickok, president and policy director of the Center for AI and Digital Policy, a nonprofit research group, stated that voice cloning is not inherently unethical.
According to Hickok, using AI-generated voices to amplify or make already public materials more accessible can be an acceptable practice. However, ethical concerns arise when filmmakers incorporate private content in a deeply personal way.
“The person made a decision to keep that private,” Hickok explained. “It is not up to us, nor anyone else, to make that decision on their behalf after they have passed away.”
Hickok also pointed out that in the case of a murder, where the victim’s voice was silenced against her will, digitally recreating it for commercial purposes is problematic. “It is not ethical, regardless of whether the family gave their approval or not,” she concluded.
Some members of Petito’s family have spoken to The Independent about the public’s reaction to the voice recreation and reflected on their decision to allow it in the documentary.
“I think it’s weird, and because we know her actual voice, [the recreated version] sounds a little off,” Petito’s mother, Nichole Schmidt, told the British outlet. “It’s just hard to hear.”
